Lance Kennedy wrote:I do not think life is inevitable. Organic molecules appear to be inevitable, but not life itself. Organic molecules appear on asteroids, in nebulae, in meteors and in all kinds of unlikely places. But life has never been seen anywhere but planet Earth. I suspect it takes a very special set of conditions to create life.

I agree we got lucky. But given the vastness of the Universe, and how carbon/water chemistry seems to get along so well together, and there's {!#%@}-tonnes everywhere we look, what do you think the chances are of it only happening once, ever?

This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

I am sure there is life elsewhere, somewhere. The question is how many star systems have some form of life somewhere. Personally, I do not think life is as common as the romantics tend to believe. It would not very much surprise me , after the invention of a giant telescope in space able to detect the molecules of life in other star systems, if Earth was the only one in our sector of the galaxy.

Well M.M., I don't know about inevitable when we speak of life such as humans, as we know it. Other life forms? Probably, but more likely in the form of a microbial life.

Why have humans only evolved here on earth? Who the hell knows. I think we all understand the big bang and the resultant evolution of us humans here on earth. Certainly a most unlikely occurrence anywhere else in our solar system, microbial perhaps, but not in the human form.

Is there a mirror situation in some distant galaxy?? Again, who the hell knows. And more importantly, who the hell will ever know. Personally, I cannot see us exploring the universe outside of our own little solar system. In a million years time? Well none of us are wise and knowing enough to even guess at that.

As I see it, our exploration beyond our own system is restricted by time, speed of light. If we cannot overcome the inability of conquering the speed of light, then space exploration is restricted to our system and whatever we can find by our telescopes. Oh, I'm sure we will learn much more than we know now, but I doubt we can overcome the essence of time.

There is no reason for humanity not exploring the wider galaxy. It will just take longer. Currently, NASA is using ion drive engines for probes travelling through the solar system. A theoretically very efficient ion drive engine could accelerate a star ship to perhaps one tenth of light speed.
The nearest other star system is Alpha Centauri, which could be reached on such a vessel within 50 to 60 years. If the crew of such a ship, in perhaps 500 years, had much longer life spans than we do, such a time might be acceptable.

The average distance between star systems in our galaxy is 4 light years. Travel at 0.1 of light speed will permit passing that distance in 40 to 60 years. Given time, humans can explore as much of the galaxy as we wish.

Lance, your argument relies heavily on the extension of human life. 500 years, long time, who knows. Perhaps we could breed on the star ship whilst we were waiting 40 to 60 years to get were we are going. Of course new members would have to be taught how to be astronauts, but that's possible.

All a lovely thought Lance, but we certainly have a lot of learning and development to do before we exit our solar system. Perhaps not the speed of light, but a lot closer that 0.1 I think.

Lance Kennedy wrote:Actually, Bobbo, occasionally I find you amusing. Is that an ad hom?

No, as you are not using that to avoid any issue in contest, thereby this is merely a rare valid insight and character assessment on your part. One that I think Gawd may get from time to time but as a dick doesn't want to admit, and one that Cadtooth probably can't see at all.

People are.................. emotional. Usually to their own harm.

Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

Given space, time, and total vagueness: one can easily support that intelligent life other than Earth is INEVITABLE. There should be no doubt until some of the variables are restricted/more narrowly defined. There is that 10 factor or so formula for the establishment of intelligent life defined as being capable of sending radio waves out into space. Each factor can be argued and discussed.

Voyager 1 has left our solar system and is now in interstellar space. Hmmm, reminds me, I wanted to get the song list on that gold record. Imagine when that gets found a billion years from now?.....I assumed it would wear and tear from cosmic dust into dust itself....but assuming not. Ha, ha........burn up in the atmosphere and likely not even a wish made on it?

Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

G: ok, I'll bite: how do you differentiate "actual" from faked to a clip from any SyFy show?

Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

G: I asked you how YOU determine if a clip is fake or real. Arguing from ignorance is a logical fail right from the start.

Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

Again, ................ you lose. You know............... it all adds up.

Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

I have a few minutes: Say G.............do you accept that your opinion/beliefs/attitudes are in the minority and that that makes them suspect?

This is a necessary component of "common sense" otherwise its just egotism and inflexibility. For instance....I have a few ideas/notions (not really rising to the level of "beliefs") that I know are in the minority..... like Eugenetics, and a few others. I will post what I honestly think.........but I don't think "I am Right" in a "I KNOW I'm right" kind of way as it appears you do. I just think I am right "from my point of view and values system".......but I know most other people disagree. But I just noticed, this IS about values ......... not the same thing at all as understanding and valuing what IS, what is physically a part of the materialistic world......so not all the applicable thoughts apply. What does still apply is realizing one has a minority opinion which should give rise to more humility/doubt/circumpection than you display.

Your thoughts?

Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

nope....minority means I have a unique mind and awareness of what's going on and of the real reality along with millions of others... ...what percentage of the public believe in aliens?..probably fairly high number....and Bohr said the 'material' world is made of stuff that's not real....so....most of the public believes the govt is lying about 911....more everyday...truth never changes...people change and eventually accept the truth...it is part of leaning and evolving in the school called Earth...

Lance Kennedy wrote:I do not think life is inevitable. Organic molecules appear to be inevitable, but not life itself. Organic molecules appear on asteroids, in nebulae, in meteors and in all kinds of unlikely places. But life has never been seen anywhere but planet Earth. I suspect it takes a very special set of conditions to create life.

bobo,
I read through thread and I have come to realize that I was being intellectually dishonest and immature (and some some unpleasant truths) and apologize for the way I acted.
It wasn't easy for me to get to that conclusion, but doing the right thing isn't always easy.

Cadmusteeth wrote:bobo,
I read through thread and I have come to realize that I was being intellectually dishonest and immature (and some some unpleasant truths) and apologize for the way I acted.
It wasn't easy for me to get to that conclusion, but doing the right thing isn't always easy.

Whoa?/?/?/?/?

..........I envy you. Right or wrong, its rare to get a "new" idea. Keep considering the issue........... and happy trails.

Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

Cadmusteeth wrote:I will. Sorry for the crappy job I did in my post. I do poorly under stress.

Ha, ha...........which post??? The attack or the recognition? A parry or a riposte? To be forgotten and retread, or a new path chosen???

This "can be" a most important recognition in anyone's life: a life examined...... and as implied, its not even "all that important" to be right or wrong. "The Play is the Thing." To keep thinking about it. The pros and the cons, the good and the bad, the summing up, the values/weights applied. They all change over time as well. Usually slow lazy spirals up or down.

Life is like that. Deciding who you want to be........ its a trip.

Rereading: its not right or wrong.....but always that irritating/challenging combination of both. How to accentuate one over the other.... for what purpose and so forth. In my own case it has lead to a successful career but personal isolation. I'm sure the very same interests can lead to........whatever is more desired.

Choices. Its always............ choices.

Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

Very few people are strong enough to admit ever being wrong, and I admire you for it. But how can the rest of us meet the standard you just set ?

Read a post "objectively" "as if" YOU didn't write it. A whole field of research there: content analysis. Its been decades too late in coming, but those "word clouds" of associations are very "scientific" allowing for a whole new way to evaluate anyone's writings...........including our own. "Objectify" what is written, and stop the game playing and bias. What really is your "value set?" Just what you have said before? Just what some talking points memo sets forth??? ......... Or what you might actually "think" if you put your mind to it?

Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?